--- Day changed Mon Oct 01 2018
08:35 < stevenroose> andytoshi:
08:35 < stevenroose> > and i guess for completeness we'll add a PublicKey -> Address which requires a network, even though i don't like that
08:35 < stevenroose> I think that's better as an Address constructor, like they already exist. An address getter on pubkey is really confusing and not needed, you can go from pk to addr in like 5 different ways
08:36 < stevenroose> I think Address::p2pkh(network, pubkey) is the right way to do it
08:40 < stevenroose> My 2 cents on the pubkey with network thing: I don't think keys should have networks attached to them. A key is a key. I think the codes that collects/generates/stores the keys should be responsible for knowing what network they are to be used in.
08:43 < stevenroose> dongcarl: also have a question though: what's the best (programmatic) way to know from a TxOut if it needs to fill witness_utxo or non_witness_utxo?  The Script struct doesn't seem to have any analysis getters like "is_sw" or whatever. Can also be hidden (p2sh sw)
08:43 < stevenroose> Is that for the spender to know?
08:44 < stevenroose> I guess filling both (witness_utxo and non_witness_utxo) is against the spec?
11:45 < stevenroose> also: dongcarl: https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin/issues/164#issuecomment-425636489
12:41 < dongcarl> stevenroose: I’m AFK for a few days, but will answer in a few days if you remind me <3
12:52 < andytoshi> stevenroose: agreed about having an Address constructor
12:58 -!- grubles_ [~grubles@unaffiliated/grubles] has joined #rust-bitcoin
12:58 -!- grubles [~grubles@unaffiliated/grubles] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:13 -!- grubles_ is now known as grubles
19:51 < stevenroose> Hmm
19:52 < stevenroose> I have a tx that I serialize through rust-bitcoin that when deserializing with rust-bitcoin, gives ParseFailed("Invalid length")
20:06 < stevenroose> Hmm, trying to reproduce in a simple file didn't give the error
20:07 < stevenroose> At least if I catched the right tx :D
20:30 < andytoshi> stevenroose: until https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin/pull/153 tranasctions won't round-trip in general
20:30 < andytoshi> but i don't think it should error
20:32 < andytoshi> hmm, actually even with #153 `04000000000000000000` will parse as a transaction, then not re-serialize .. i shuold check on that
20:35 < andytoshi> oh, heh, we have special code for empty transactions that is not replicated on serialization. hmmm.
20:36 < andytoshi> i wonder if #153 should remove that
20:40 < andytoshi> i think so. updated
20:46 < stevenroose> was one that bitcoind gave me
20:46 < stevenroose> looking into it, can't seem to find what's going on. I got it from bitcoind, deserialized it, inspected, serialized, stored; next run: deserialization fails :D
20:47 < stevenroose> anyway gtg